admitted to problems in her court but does not think she should be suspended, according to a court document filed Wednesday.

Marion Superior Court Judge Kimberly J. Brown admitted in the documents that at least 10 people experienced delays in being released from jail because of errors that she or her staff committed.

Brown also took responsibility for allegations leveled by the the Commission on Judicial Qualifications that she failed to properly train and supervise her employees. She said she “deeply regrets” any failures in training and supervising her staff and has put a plan in place to improve those issues.

The judge’s response addresses a request filed last month by the commission calling for Brown to be suspended from the bench pending resolution of misconduct charges.

The response was filed on Brown’s behalf by Indianapolis attorney Aaron E. Haith about 90 minutes before the deadline established by the Indiana Supreme Court. Haith said he could not comment on the case at this time.

No date has been set for a hearing on the suspension petition, which will be heard by the Supreme Court. For the high court to issue an interim suspension, justices must find the action is necessary “to protect public confidence in the integrity of the judiciary.”

The commission’s call for the interim suspension is an “extraordinary measure” in cases involving complaints against sitting judges, according to charging documents. This is only the second time since 2009 that the commission has moved to suspend a judge while charges are pending.

The action, attorneys for the commission said in the petition, “is merited in this situation, as (Brown) has engaged in a continuing course of conduct which has led to multiple defendants being wrongfully deprived of their liberty, multiple defendants being denied the right to be heard in a timely fashion, and numerous individuals suffering other detrimental consequences.”

The petition for suspension also says Brown “has engaged in this course of conduct despite several attempts by other officials to mediate or solve issues.”

Brown, a Democrat elected to the bench in 2008, faces misconduct charges that include dereliction of duty, delaying the release of at least nine defendants from jail, failing to train or supervise court employees, creating a hostile environment for staff and attorneys, and failing to properly complete paperwork. She could face permanent removal from judicial office if the misconduct charges stick.

The allegations against the judge are similar to criminal charges in that they are only allegations and must be proved at the equivalent of a trial before the Supreme Court. The allegations date to 2009 and continued through July of this year.

The Supreme Court will determine whether Brown is guilty of the charges, as well as what punishment, if any, she should face.

Brown’s response includes an accompanying memorandum that provides details of corrective actions she has or plans to take. It indicates she has or is willing to address concerns raised by the commission and “is resolute that she can and will learn from what has been alleged, and that she will redouble her efforts to proceed.”

The judge also denies some of the allegations.

Regarding claims she failed or refused to properly train court staff, Brown said she “deeply regrets” any failures and “has taken positive steps to insure, to the best of her ability, that appropriate training and supervision is continuing and ongoing.”

Her court is now fully staffed and trained, she said.

Brown contends “that she in no way” intended to disrespect people who appeared in court and has not retaliated against anyone, including those who may have filed complaints against her.